The  Ohio    State    University   Bulletin 

Volume  XXI  October,  1916 


NUMB] 


THE  LOYALIST  REFUGEES 
'  of  NEW  HAMPSHIRE 


PUBLISHED  BY  THE  UNIVERSITY  AT  COLUMBUS 

Entered  as  second-class  matter   November  17,  1905,  at  the  postoffio 
at  Columbus,  Ohio,  under  Act  of  Congress,  July  16,  1894 


les  are: 

The  Legacy  of  the  American  Revolution  to  the  British  West  Indies  and 
Bahamas.     Published  by  the  U  ...April.   1913. 

The  Exodus  of  the  Loyalists  from  Penobscot  to  Passamaquoddy.     Pub 

lished  ......  tori]      91  : 


iUR  H.  SlEBER 


THE  LOYALIST  REFUGEES 
of  NEW  HAMPSHIRE 


By 

WILBUR  H.  SIEBERT,  A.  M. 

Professpr  of  European  History 


Published  by 

The  Ohio  State  University 
Columbus 

1916 


E-277 

S£>4 


^^ua:T^ 


Contents 

PAGE 

Number  of  Loyalists  in  New  Hampshire   3 

Early  flights  from  the  Colony 3 

New  Hampshire  Refugees  with  Burgoyne  and  with  the  British 

at  New  York   5 

Portsmouth  as  a  Tory  Center 6 

Liberty  granted  Tories  to  depart 7 

Suspicion  of  the  Quakers  and  proscription  of  the  Tories 7 

Confiscation  of  Tory  property •    .  9 

Wentworth's  Volunteers  and  the  Associated  Refugees  10 

The  King's  American  Dragoons 11 

Migration   of    some   of    the   New   Hampshire   Loyalists   to 

Annapolis 13 

The  King's  American  Dragoons  on  the  St.  John  River  16 

Ex-Governor  John  Wentworth  in  Nova  Scotia 17 

Amos  Botsford  and  Associates  at  Digby 18 

Return  of  Refugees  forbidden  in  New  Hampshire 22 

Claremont  Loyalists  seek  admission  to  Lower  Canada,  1784  22 


The  Loyalist  Refugees  of  New  Hampshire 


The  best  index  of  the  relative  number  of  Loyalists  in  New 
Hampshire  in  the  early  months  of  the  Revolution  appears  in  the 
figures  obtained  through  the  submission  of  the  "association  test" 
during  the  summer  1776,  in  responserhe  resolution  of  the  Conti- 
nental Congress  of  March  14  of  the  year  named,  recommending  the 
disarming  by  the  local  authorities  of  the  several  Colonies  of  all 
persons  notoriously  disaffected  to  the  American  cause,  or  who  re- 
fused to  associate  for  the  defense  of  the  country  "against  the  hos- 
tile attempts  of  the  British  fleets  and  armies."  Eighty-one  hundred 
and  ninety-nine  men  signed  the  test,  and  seven  hundred  and  seventy- 
three  declined,  or  neglected,  to  affix  their  signatures.  That  is  to 
say,  over  one-eleventh  of  those  to  whom  the  test  was  submitted 
failed  to  sign  it.  This  fraction  included  about  200  Quakers  of 
Brentwood,  Gilmantown,  Kensington,  Richmond,  Rochester,  and 
other  towns,  who  withheld  their  names  chiefly  on  account  of  their 
scruples.  Some  of  these  non-jurors  were  certainly  not  Tories,  if  we 
may  accept  the  explanations  offered  by  them  to  the  selectmen  of 
their  respective  towns.  Thus,  the  Quakers,  of  Gilmantown  found 
no  difficulty  in  accepting  the  Declaration  of  Independence  or  paying 
their  proportion  in  support  of  the  United  Colonies,  but  based  their 
failure  to  sign  the  test  solely  on  the  ground  of  their  religious  prin- 
ciples. James  Caruth,  a  Scotch  inhabitant  of  Kingstown,  declined 
to  take  up  arms  against  either  his  native  or  his  adopted  country, 
but  announced  his  readiness  to  pay  his  taxes;  while  others  of  his 
fellow-townsmen  professed  the  fear  of  infringing  their  liberties  by 
signing,  although  asserting  friendliness  to  the  American  cause,  and 
in  a  few  instances  demonstrating  it  by  serving  in  the  Continental 
army.1 

Even  allowing  for  these  friendly  non-jurors,  however,  we  must 
not  overlook  the  fact  that  some  Tories  had  already  fled  from  New 

!N.  H.  State  Papers,  Documents,  and  Records  from  1776  to  1783,  VIII 
204-296;  Brewster,  Rambles  about  Portsmouth,  N.  H.,  212-215. 


699223 


Hampshire,  or  were  soon  to  do  so.  In  June,  1775,  bodies  of  armed 
men  at  Portsmouth  pursued  John  Fen  ton,  an  expelled  member  of 
the  House  of  Assembly,  to  the  residence  of  Governor  John  Went- 
worth,  and  compelled  him  to  surrender.  He  was  then  given  a 
hearing  by  the  Provincial  Congress  and  incarcerated  in  the  jail  at 
Exeter,  but  was  later  allowed  to  escape  and  go  to  England.  Wood- 
bury Langdon,  a  merchant  of  Portsmouth  who  also  served  in  the 
Provincial  Congress,  sailed  for  the  mother  country  in  October,  1775. 
In  a  memorial  to  Lord  North,  dated  February  7,  1777,  he  explains 
that  he  had  left  America  after  "using  his  influence  for  peace  and 
good  order,"  to  the  end  of  preserving  his  family,  his  life,  and  his 
property,  and  that  he  might  "avoid  all  temptation  to  take  sides 
with  his  disaffected  countrymen."  Meantime,  Governor  Wentworth 
and  his  family  had  retired  to  Fort  William  and  Henry  in  Portsmouth 
Harbor  for  safety,  whence  they  embarked  on  the  King's  ship  Canso, 
August  24,  1775,  being  accompanied  by  Captain  John  Cochran,  the 
commander  of  the  now  dismantled  fort,  and  doubtless  by  other 
adherents  of  the  royal  cause.  After  landing  at  Boston  the  Went- 
worths  remained  with  the  British  army,  going  to  Halifax  in  March, 
1776,  and  at  length  to  Philadelphia  on  their  way  to  London. 
They  arrived  in  the  British  metropolis,  March  13,  1778.  Other 
refugees  from  New  Hampshire  also  sought  protection  within  the 
lines  at  Boston,  including  Elijah  Williams  who  with  several  others 
fled  from  Keene  soon  after  the  battle  of  Lexington,  John  Morrison 
who  became  attached  to  the  commissary  department  of  the  King's 
forces  after  the  battle  of  Bunker  Hill,  Colonel  Edward  Goldstone 
Lutwyche  a  member  of  the  Provincial  Congress  until  1775,  William 
Stark  who  received  a  colonel's  commission  in  the  royal  army  after 
being  refused  one  in  the  New  Hampshire  contingent,  George 
Meserve  the  collector  of  customs  at  Portsmouth,  Samuel  Hale,  Jr., 
Gillan  Butler,  Joseph  Stacy  Hastings,  and  probably  John  Fisher  the 
naval  officer  at  Portsmouth  and  supposed  to  be  identical  with  the 
person  of  the  same  name  who  was  a  brother-in-law  of  Governor 
Wentworth  and  was  later  to  become,  like  Benjamin  Thompson  of 
Concord,  a  secretary  in  the  Colonial  Secretary's  office  in  London. 
After  making  himself  obnoxious  by  entertaining  two  British  officers, 
Benjamin  Thompson  withdrew  from  Woburn,  but  on  discovering 
that  his  presence  there  was  not  desired,  hastened  to  Rhode  Island 


and  sailed  for  Boston  in  October,  1775.     In  the  following  January 
he  sailed  for  England.1 

However,  not  all  the  refugees  from  New  Hampshire  went  to 
England,  or  even  to  Boston.  At  least  a  few  joined  Burgoyne  dur- 
ing the  fall  of  1777,  including  Levi  Warner  of  Claremont,  who  tes- 
tifies that  he  served  with  the  British  during  the  entire  war  and 
was  at  St.  Johns  at  the  head  of  Lake  Champlain  in  1783,  and  Cap- 
tain Simon  Baxter  who  was  condemned  to  death  by  the  Whigs,  but 
on  the  day  set  for  his  execution  escaped  "with  the  rope  around  his 
neck  and  succeeded  in  reaching  Burgoyne's  army."  At  the  peace 
he  went  to  New  Brunswick  and  was  living  at  Norton,  King's  Coun- 
ty, when  death  finally  overtook  him  in  1804.  Joseph  Stacey 
Hastings,  a  Harvard  graduate  of  the  class  of  1762,  sought  safety 
at  Halifax,  although  he  ultimately  returned  to  Boston  where  he 
kept  a  grocery  store.  No  doubt,  New  York  City  and  the  neigh- 
boring islands  became  sooner  or  later  during  the  Revolution  the 
favorite  asylums  of  the  exiles  from  New  Hampshire,  as  they  were 
for  most  of  those  from  the  other  Northern  States.  Indeed,  some 
of  them  accompanied  Howe's  army  from  the  Nova  Scotian  capital 
to  Staten  Island  in  the  fall  of  1776.  Among  these  was  Governor 
Wentworth  himself,  who  spent  more  or  less  of  his  time  at  Flat- 
bush  on  Long  Island,  only  a  few  miles  from  New  York,  until  his 
departure  for  Philadelphia  and  London.  In  a  letter  to  his  sister 
written  from  this  point,  in  January,  1777,  the  deposed  Governor, 
referring  to  a  group  of  his  fellow  refugees  from  Portsmouth  who 
had  returned  with  him  to  American  soil,  reports  the  good  health 
of  Messrs.  Meserve,  Hale,  and  Lutwyche,  as  also  of  Captain  Coch- 
ran, Mr.  Macdonough,  and  Mr.  Wentworth,  the  three  last  being 
with  him,  as  he  specifically  states.  As  we  have  already  met  most 
of  these  gentlemen  it  will  suffice  here  to  say  that  Thomas  Mac- 
donough had  been  Governor  Wentworth's  secretary  and  that  Ben- 
ning  Wentworth  was  to  return  to  Nova  Scotia  after  the  peace  and 
to  be  honored  with  several  high  offices  there  (a  membership  in  the 
Council,  and  the  secretaryship  and  treasurship  of  the  Province) 

Brewster,  Rambles  about  Portsmouth,  2d  Series,  252,  253;  Sabine,  Am.  Loy- 
alists, (1847)  680,  215;  Sec.  Rep.,  Bur.  of  Archives,  Ont.  Pt.  I  (1904)  831; 
Hutchinson's  Diary  and  Letters,  II,  192;  Colls.  Hist.,  and  Miscel.  and  Monthly 
Lit.  Jour.,  Ill,  44,  220;  Colls.  Top.,  Hist.,  and  Biog.,  I,  55;  Colls.  N.  H.  Hist. 
Soc,  II,  112;  Raymond,  Winslow  Papers,  429;  Sabine,  Am.  Loyalists,  476,  464, 
433,  630,  341,  286;  Lyford,  Hist,  of  Concord,  N.  H.,  I,  252-254. 


L— 2 


during  the  years  1795  to  1797.  The  Governor  refers  in  the  same 
letter  to  Messrs.  Boyd  and  Traill  who  were  evidently  also  in  exile 
the  former  being  undoubtedly  George  Boyd  who  had  been  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Council  of  New  Hampshire,  while  the  latter  was  with 
equal  certainty  Robert  Traill,  until  recently  comptroller  of  the 
customs  at  Portsmouth.  Where  these  persons  were  at  the  time  is 
left  in  doubt,  i 

The  early  flights  from  New  Hampshire  and  particularly  from 
Portsmouth,  which  was  the  seat  of  the  provincial  government, 
must  have  been  increased  by  the  termination  of  royal  authority 
there  and  also  by  the  action  of  the  Continental  Congress,  October 
6,  1775/  in  recommending  to  the  various  provincial  assemblies  and 
committees  of  safety  the  arrest  of  such  persons  as  were  regarded 
to  be  dangerous  to  the  liberties  of  America.  Gen.  John  Sullivan 
violently  denounced  "that  infernal  crew  of  Tories"  at  Portsmouth 
in  a  letter  of  October  29th  to  Washington,  who  replied  November 
12th,  with  an  order  that  all  officers  of  the  royal  government  who 
had  manifested  an  unfriendly  disposition  be  seized  and  dealt  with 
according  to  the  wishes  of  the  Provincial  Congress  or  Committee 
of  Safety.  The  other  Tory  inhabitants  of  the  town  were  specific- 
ally omitted  from  this  order,  although  Washington  declared  that 
they  would  "meet  with  this  or  a  worse  fate"  in  the  near  future,  if 
they  failed  to  reform  their  conduct.  When,  in  the  middle  of  Nov- 
ember, the  New  Hampshire  Congress  took  action  in  accordance 
with  Washington's  recommendation,  it  contented  itself  with  desig- 
nating six  persons  only  for  removal  to  moderate  distances  from 
Portsmouth,  or  for  confinement  in  specified  towns.  The  fact  that 
the  penalties  imposed  were  not  of  a  severer  nature,  or  the  number  of 
those  condemned  larger  may  be  fairly  taken  as  another  indication 
that  the  more  objectionable  officials  had  already  fled.  However, 
the  six  victims  were  let  off  easily,  for  they  were  kept  under  re- 
straint less  than  six  weeks.2 

As  yet  New  Hampshire  had  not  adopted  the  policy  of  expel- 
ling its  dangerous  inhabitants.  On  the  contrary,  it  was  to  become 
in  the  late  autumn  the  custodian  of  considerable  numbers  of  such 

^ec.  Rep.,  Bur.  of  Archives,  Ont;  (1904)  Pt.  II,  1020;  Sabine,  Am.  Loyal- 
ists, 148,  149,  350;  N.  H.  Prov.  Papers,  Documents,  and  Records,  1674-1776, 
VII,  394;  Sabine,  Am.  Loyalists,  453,  680,  171,  651. 

2N.  H.  Provincial  Papers,  Documents,  and  Records,  (1764-1776),  VII,  623, 
662,  695. 

6 


persons  from  New  York,  sent  over  by  the  Committee  of  Conspira- 
cies of  that  State.  One  group  of  these  prisoners,  which  was  for- 
warded to  Exeter  in  the  latter  part  of  October,  or  later,  numbered 
117  persons;  but  in  March,  1777,  the  New  Hampshire  Committee 
of  Safety  was  notified  by  a  new  board  of  Commissioners,  recently 
appointed  by  the  New  York  Convention,  that  all  of  the  latter's 
prisoners  were  to  be  recalled  and  given  the  choice  between  taking 
the  oath  of  allegiance,  or  seeking  the  protection  of  the  enemy. 
Meanwhile,  New  Hampshire  sought  to  encourage  the  departure  of 
her  own  Tories,  for  on  January  16th  her  House  of  Representatives 
adopted  a  resolution  granting  full  liberty  to  such  of  the  inhabit- 
ants as  were  disaffected  and  desirous  of  leaving  the  State  with 
their  families  and  effects  to  do  so  within  the  next  three  months 
and,  in  the  language  of  the  resolution  itself,  "go  to  any  other 
parts  of  the  Globe  they  may  choose,"  provided  that  they  would  no- 
tify the  selectmen  of  their  respective  towns  30  days  in  advance  of 
their  departure.1  Again,  we  are  confronted  by  the  lack  of  evidence 
that  would  enable  us  to  determine  how  many  took  advantage  of 
the  terms  of  this  resolution.  Doubtless,  that  evidence  lies  buried 
in  numerous  town  records  of  the  period,  insofar  as  these  have 
survived  to  the  present  day.  On  June  13,  1777,  the  House  of  Re- 
presentatives itself  readily  granted  permission  to  John  Pierce,  of 
Portsmouth,  who  was  then  in  prison,  "to  repair  to  the  West  Indies 
or  to  Great  Britain,  and  not  to  return  to  this  State  nor  to  any  part 
of  this  Continent,  without  leave  had  and  obtained  of  the  General 
Assembly  or  of  the  Continental  Congress."2  With  equal  readi- 
ness the  New  Hampshire  Committee  of  Safety  gave  its  consent  on 
October  8  to  a  schooner  that  had  recently  arrived  at  Portsmouth 
under  a  flag  of  truce  to  transport  the  families  of  Benjamin  Hart 
and  other  designated  inhabitants  to  Rhode  Island,  an  exception 
being  made  in  the  case  of  one  person  only,  who  was  held  as  a 
prisoner  of  war.  3 

A  month  later  the  House  of  Representatives  showed  conclu- 
sively that  it  entertained  suspicions  toward  the  non-juring  Quakers 
of  the  State  by  appointing  a  committee  from  several  counties  to 

■Brewster,  Rambles  about  Portsmouth,  N.  H.,  204-296. 
2N.  H.  State  Papers,  Documents,  and  Records  from  1776  to  1783,  VIII. 
379-383,  393,  394,  508,  468,  584. 
8Ibid„  702. 


examine  the  records  and  papers  of  the  Friends'  societies  in  Dover, 
Hampton  Falls,  Seabrook,  and  other  towns  with  a  view  to  trans- 
mitting to  the  House  for  further  inspection  any  writings  of  a 
political  nature  that  might  be  disclosed.1  But,  after  all,  it  was 
not  the  Quakers  against  whom  the  General  Assembly  directed  its 
most  determined  action.  This  action  was  embodied  in  the  measure 
adopted  in  November,  1778,  to  prevent  the  return  of  76  persons 
named  therein  and  of  others  who  had  left,  or  might  leave,  the  State 
and  had  joined,  or  might  join,  the  enemy.  These  persons  were 
roundly  denounced  for  deserting  the  cause  of  liberty  and  abetting 
that  of  tyranny  by  depriving  the  United  States  of  their  personal 
services  at  a  time  when  their  utmost  assistance  was  needed;  and 
since  their  return  might  be  productive  of  new  dangers  the  measure 
forbade  their  voluntary  reappearance  without  leave,  obtained  in 
advance,  by  special  act  of  the  Assembly.  It  also  made  it  the  duty 
of  the  inhabitants  of  any  district,  as  well  as  of  the  local  officers, 
to  apprehend  and  carry  before  a  justice  of  the  peace  for  commis- 
sion to  the  common  jail  any  absentee  who  might  presume  to  return. 
The  person  thus  committed  was  to  be  kept  in  custody  until  he 
should  be  sent  out  of  the  State.  A  master  of  a  vessel  who  know 
ingly  brought  into  the  State  any  of  the  persons  above  described, 
or  a  person  who  willingly  harbored  a  return  refugee,  was  to  pay 
a  fine  of  £500  on  conviction,  one-half  to  go  to  the  State  and  the 
other  to  him  who  should  sue  for  it.  Fugitives  who  should  return 
a  second  time  were  to  suffer  death.  Of  those  named  in  the  act  32 
had  been  residents  of  Portsmouth,  6  of  Londonderry,  5  of  Keene, 
4  of  Dunbarton,  3  of  Hollis,  and  a  like  number  of  Alstead,  while 
a  dozen  or  more  other  towns  had  contributed  the  remainder  in 
smaller  numbers.2 

JN.  H.  State  Papers,  Documents,  and  Records,  (1776-1783)  VIII,  713. 

2By  towns  those  proscribed .  were  as  follows:  from  Portsmouth,  John 
Wentworth,  Esq.,  Peter  Livius,  Esq.,  John  Fisher,  Esq.,  Geo.  Meserve,  Esq., 
Robt.  Traill,  Esq.,  Geo.  Boyd,  Esq.,  John  Fenton,  Esq.,  (Capt.)  John  Cochran, 
Esq.,  Samuel  Hale,  Esq.,  Edward  Parry,  Esq.,  Thos.  McDonough,  Esq.,  Maj. 
Robt.  Rogers,  Andrew  Pepperell  Sparhawk,  Esq.,  Patrick  Burn,  mariner, 
John  Smith,  mariner,  Wm.  Johnson  Rysam,  mariner,  Stephen  Little,  physician, 
Thos.  and  Archibald  Achincloss,  Robt.  Robinson,  merchant,  Hugh  Henderson, 
merchant,  Gillam  Butler,  merchant,  Jas.  and  John  McMasters,  merchants,  Jas. 
Bixby,  yeoman,  Wm.  Pevey,  mariner,  Benj.  Hart,  rope-maker,  Bartholomew 
Stavers,  post-rider,  Philip  Bayley,  trader,  Samuel  Holland,  Esq.,  Benning 
Wentworth,  gentleman,  Jude  Kermison,  mariner;  from  Pembroke,  Jonathan 
Dix,   trader;    from  Exeter,  Robt.  Luist  Fowler,  printer;  from  Concord,  Benj. 

8 


Before  the  end  of  November,  1778,  the  Assembly  proceeded  to 
confiscate  the  real  and  personal  property  of  23  of  the  proscribed, 
together  with  those  of  two  other  Loyalists  whose  names  had  not 
appeared  in  the  act  of  proscription.  These  two  persons  seem  to 
have  been  non-residents  of  the  State.1  In  each  county  trustees, 
or  agents,  were  appointed  to  take  possession  of  the  sequestered 
estates  and  sell  the  personal  property  immediately  at  public  auc- 
tion, except  such  articles  as  they  might  deem  necessary  for  the 
support  of  the  families  of  the  proscribed.  In  the  case  of  the  furni- 
ture and  family  pictures  of  Governor  Wentworth,  however,  it  was 
not  the  trustee  but  the  Assembly  itself  that  decided  (April  27, 1780) 
that  these  personal  effects  should  be  delivered  up  to  the  father  of 
the  absent  official,  namely,  Mark  Hunting  Wentworth.  The  need 
of  clothing  for  the  Continental  army  led  the  Assembly  at  the  close 
of  March,  1781,  to  direct  the  trustees  of  the  confiscated  estates 
to  pay  into  the  State  Treasury  at  once  the  money  accruing  rfom 
sales  thus  far  made.  At  the  same  time,  the  Treasurer  was  directed 
to  appropriate  this  money  to  the  payment  of  orders  for  military 
clothing  which  had  been,  or  was  yet  to  be  issued  by  the  Board  of 
War.     A  few  days  later  (that  is,  on  April  4)  a  committee  of  the 

Thompson,  Esq.;  from  Londonderry,  Stephen  Holland,  Esq.,  Richard  Holland, 
yeoman,  John  Davidson,  yeoman,  Jas.  Fulton,  yeoman,  Thos.  Smith,  yeoman, 
Dennis  O'Hala,  yeoman;  from  New  Market,  Geo.  Bell,  trader,  Jacob  Brown, 
trader;  from  Merrimack,  Edward  Goldstone  Lutwyche,  Esq.;  from  Hollis, 
Samuel  Cummings,  Esq.,  Benj.  Whiting,  Esq.,  Thos.  Cummings,  yeoman;  from 
Dunbarton,  Wm.  Stark,  Esq.,  John  Stark,  yeoman,  John  Stinson,  Jr.,  Samuel 
Stinson,  Jeremiah  Bo  wen,  yeoman;  from  Amherst,  Zaccheus  Cutler,  trader, 
John  Holland,  gentleman;  from  New  Ipswich,  Daniel  Farnsworth,  yeoman; 
from  Francestown,  John  Quigley,  Esq.;  from  Peterborough,  John  Morrison, 
clerk;  from  Keene,  Josiah  Pompoy,  physician,  Elijah  Williams,  Esq.,  Thos. 
Cutler,  gentleman,  Eleazer  Sawyer,  yeoman,  Robt.  Gillmore,  yeoman;  from 
Packersfield,  Breed  Batchelder,  gentleman;  from  Alstead,  Simon  and  Wm. 
Baxter,  yeomen;  from  Winchester,  Solomon  Willard,  gentleman;  from  Rindge, 
Jesse  Rice,  physician;  from  Charlestown,  Enos  Stevens,  gentleman,  Phineas 
Stevens,  physician,  Solomon  Stevens,  yeoman,  Levi  Willard,  gentleman;  from 
Claremont,  John  Brooks,  yeoman;  and  from  Hinsdale,  Josiah  and  Simon  Jones, 
gentlemen.  (N.  H.  State  Papers.  Documents,  and  Records,  1776-1783,  VIII, 
810-812;  Belnap,  Hist,  of  N.  H.,  I,  380,  381.) 

JThe  names  appearing  in  the  act  of  confiscation  (Nov.  28,  1778)  are  as 
follows:  John  Wentworth,  Esq.,  Samuel  Holland,  Esq.,  Geo.  Meserve,  Esq., 
(Capt.)  John  Cochran,  Esq.,  Thomas  McDonough,  Esq.,  Wm.  Johnson  Rysam, 
Jas.  McMasters,  John  McMasters,  Benning  Wentworth,  gentleman,  Robt. 
Luist  Fowle,  Stephen  Holland,  gentleman,  Edward  Goldstone  Lutwyche,  Esq., 
John  Stinson,  Zaccheus  Cutler,  John  Quigley,  Esq.,  Daniel  Farnsworth,  Josiah 
Pomroy,  Elijah  Williams,  Esq.,  Breed  Batchelder,  Enos  Stevens,  Simon  Bax- 
ter, John  Brooks,  Crean  Brush  (of  Cumberland  County,  N.  Y.),  Samuel  Tar- 
bell,  and  Jas.  Rogers. 

9 


Lower  House,  to  which  had  been  referred  the  question  what  should 
be  done  with  such  estates  of  absentees  and  subjects  of  Great  Brit- 
ain as  had  not  been  confiscated  hitherto,  reported  in  favor  of  the 
immediate  sequestration  and  sale  of  these  properties,  and  this  was 
probably  done.1 

The  history  of  a  considerable  number  of  the  New  Hampshire 
Loyalists  after  their  flight  from  the  State  may  best  be  traced  by 
examining  the  record  of  the  corps  of  Volunteers  associated  by 
Governor  Wentworth  probably  after  his  arrival  on  Long  Island  in 
the  fall  of  1776.  The  Governor  himself  testified  in  1784  that  his 
men  were  very  respectable  persons  from  their  several  Provinces 
who  "supported  themselves  at  their  own  expense."  So  far  as 
known  the  first  muster  roll  of  this  company  was  taken  at  Flush- 
ing, Long  Island,  October  16,  1777,  when  the  officers  were  Cap- 
tain Daniel  Murray  of  Rutland,  Massachusetts,  First  Lieutenant 
Benjamin  Whiting  of  Hollis,  New  Hampshire,  and  Second  Lieu- 
tenant Elijah  Williams  of  Keene,  New  Hampshire,  and  the  number 
of  men  was  scarcely  more  than  20.  Six  months  later  the  com- 
pany was  mustered  at  Hampstead,  Long  Island,  and  numbered  but 
26.  In  the  following  month  (June,  1778,)  21  of  its  members,  in- 
cluding the  officers  named  above,  petitioned  General  Sir  Henry 
Clinton  from  Bedford,  Long  Island,  for  such  support  as  their  serv- 
ice might  require,  because  they  had  been  deprived  of  their  prop- 
erty and  in  a  few  cases  of  considerable  fortunes.  Eleven  of  these 
petitioners  were  from  New  Hampshire,  6  from  Massachusetts,  3 
from  Connecticut,  and  1  from  Rhode  Island.  Of  8  others  who  be- 
longed to  the  company  at  this  time,  or  later,  at  least  5  were  from 
New  Hampshire.  By  the  close  of  June,  1778,  Wentworth's  Vol- 
unteers had  more  than  doubled  in  numbers,  but  during  the  next 
two  months  they  shrunk  to  26.  We  next  hear  of  the  company  at 
Newport,  Rhode  Island,  at  the  end  of  March,  1779,  whence  they 
operated  with  Captain  Abraham  DePeyster's  Grenadier  Company 
of  the  King's  American  Regiment,  a  detachment  of  Colonel  George 
Wightman's  Loyal  New  Englanders,  and  Captain  Martin's 
corps,  under  the  name  of  the  Associated  Refugees,  in  an  unsuc- 
cessful expedition  against  New  Bedford,  Massachusetts,  and  im- 
mediately afterward  in  a  bombardment  of  Falmouth,  Maine.     They 

*N.  H.  State  Papers,  Documents,  and  Records,  (1776-1783)  VIII,  813,  814, 
857,  893,  896. 

io 


were  back  at  Newport  by  April  6th.  From  this  time  on  until 
Rhode  Island  was  evacuated  by  the  British  in  the  fall  the  Associated 
Refugees  were  active  in  operations  in  Buzzards  Bay,  at  Nantucket 
and  Martha's  Vineyard,  and  along  the  Connecticut  coast,  as  re- 
lated at  some  length  in  the  chapter  on  "The  Refugee  Loyalists  of 
Connecticut."  Having  retrned  to  Long  Island,  Wentworth's  Vol- 
unteers were  mustered  at  Jerusalem  near  the  end  of  May,  1780, 
and  found  to  number  41  men.  Seven  months  later  they  were  at 
Lloyd's  Neck  with  an  equal  strength,  although  it  is  said  that  they 
reached  their  maximum  enrollment  of  83  men  at  this  time  (De- 
cember, 1780.)     The  last  muster  was  held  in  March,  1781. * 

Whatever  the  size  of  the  company  at  the  moment,  Colonel 
Edward  Winslow,  who  had  been  in  command  of  the  Associated 
Refugees  during  a  part  of  their  service  in  Rhode  Island,  together 
with  Captain  Murray  and  Major  Joshua  Upham,  was  now  seeking 
to  form  a  Loyalist  brigade  and  trying  to  obtain  Governor  Went- 
worth's consent  to  command  it.  As  a  part  of  this  plan  Murray 
had  proposed  to  General  Clinton  the  raising  of  a  troop  of  Dragoons, 
but  was  meeting  with  various  difficulties,  one  of  which  was  due 
to  his  failure  to  obtain  a  pass  from  headquarters  to  bring  off  cer- 
tain recruits  with  the  result,  according  to  Winslow's  account,  that 
"18  men  who  would  have  been  doing  duty  as  dragoons  in  the  serv- 
ice" were  captured  and  sent  to  the  Simsbury  mines  in  Connecticut, 
Winslow  added  that  he  was  quite  willing  to  wait  until  Murray's 
corps  was  completed  and  Upham's  respectable  in  numbers,  and 
that  he  had  no  reason  to  suppose  that  he  would  fail  in  securing 
an  appointment  as  lieutenant  colonel,  although  admitting  himself 
unsuccessful  in  every  attempt  to  secure  recognition  since  Clinton's 
accession  to  the  chief  command  in  America.  His  failure  thus  far 
Colonel  Winslow  attributed  to  the  "unpardonable  inattention"  with 
which  General  Timothy  Ruggles,  his  first  patron,  had  been  treated 
by  General  Clinton  and  the  disgust  which  Ruggles  had  therefore 
contracted  for  "present  men  and  measures,"  in  consequence  of 
which  "he  could  neither  negotiate  with  confidence  or  serve  with 
alacrity."  However,  a  more  cogent  reason  for  Winslow's  failure 
to  achieve  the  military  rank  he  coveted  appears  in  the  competing 
ambition  of  Benjamin  Thompson  who,  through  the  favor  of  Lord 

Second  Rep.,  Bur.  of  Archives,  Ont,  Pt.  I,  (1904),  567;  Muster  Rolls  of  the 
Loyalist  Battalions  (at  St.  John,  N.  B.);  Raymond,  Winslow  Papers,  20. 

II 


George  Germain,  had  secured  in  England  an  appointment  as  lieu- 
tenant colonel  and  was  having  a  refugee  corps  known  as  the  King's 
American  Dragoons  recruited  for  him  at  this  very  time.  It  was 
in  this  corps  that  Captain  Murray,  Lieutenant  Williams  and  most 
of  their  men — many  with  commissions — were  enrolled,  together 
with  Colonel  Wightman's  Loyal  New  Englanders,  now  numbering 
scarcely  more  than  50  men,  and  Major  Joshua  Upham's  Volunteers 
of  New  England,  who  had  attained  a  maximum  strength  of  only  32 
men.  Altogether  these  three  companies  furnished  no  more  than 
125  recruits  for  the  new  regiment.  The  opportune  arrival  at  New 
York  of  the  Bonetta  from  Yorktown,  Virginia,  after  the  surrender 
of  Cornwallis,  brought  in  a  remnant  of  the  Queen's  Rangers  and 
Tarleton's  British  Legion,  which  is  said  to  have  been  added  to 
Colonel  Thompson's  corps.  Be  this  as  it  may,  the  muster  rolls 
show  that  the  corps  consisted  of  228  men  at  the  close  of  December, 
1781,  when  it  was  stationed  at  New  Utrecht,  Long  Island. 

Meanwhile,  in  the  previous  autumn,  Colonel  Thompson  had 
arrived  at  Charleston,  South  Carolina,  and  after  a  brief  participa- 
tion in  the  British  operations  in  that  vicinity,  sailed  for  New  York 
in  the  following  April  to  take  command  of  his  regiment.  In  the 
latter  part  of  June  he  was  getting  ready  "to  recruit  in  good  ear- 
nest," as  he  wrote  a  friend  at  the  time,  although  he  fails  to  men- 
tion in  his  letter  the  recent  addition  of  16  volunteers.  About  a 
month  later  (July  24,  1782)  Rivington's  Royal  Gazette  contained 
an  advertisement  offering  10  guineas  to  volunteers  for  the  King's 
American  Dragoons,  or  5  guineas  to  any  one  who  would  bring  in 
a  recruit  and  5  guineas  to  the  recruit  himself.  It  was  announced 
also  that  an  officer  would  remain  on  duty  at  Lloyd's  Neck  for  the 
convenience  of  those  who  might  cross  from  the  mainland  at  that 
point.  By  the  middle  of  September  the  corps  was  at  Ireland 
Heights,  three  miles  east  of  Flushing,  and  numbered  312  rank  and 
file,  but  was  marched  to  Huntington  on  October  1st,  where  it  built 
a  fort  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  the  trade  across  the  Sound  in 
that  region,  according  to  an  item  in  the  Gazette,  but  which  was 
probably  intended  chiefly  as  a  winter  shelter  for  the  troops  them- 
selves. By  December  1st  the  corps  was  reported  as  consisting  of 
550  effectives,  and  18  days  later  this  figure  was  increased  to  580 
in  Rivington's  columns.     That  these  statements  were  exaggera- 


12 


tions  is  conclusively  shown  by  the  muster  rolls,  according  to 
the  highest  number  ever  in  the  corps  was  332  on  April  12,  1783, 
when  the  King's  American  Dragoons  were  at  Springfield,  Long 
Island.1  Although  most  of  the  New  Hampshire  men  who  entered 
the  King's  service  belonged  to  this  regiment,  a  few  are  known  to 
have  joined  other  Loyalist  corps.  Thus,  John  Stinson  of  Hillsboro 
served  for  a  period  in  the  Royal  American  Reformers;  Stephen 
Holland,  probably  from  Londonderry,  was  a  member  of  the  Prince 
of  Wales  American  Volunteers;  Robert  Robinson  became  an  ensign 
in  the  Loyal  American  Regiment,  and  John  Stark  attained  a  lieu- 
tenancy in  the  Royal  Guides  and  Pioneers. 2 

At  the  termination  of  the  war  the  refugees  from  New  Hamp- 
shire were  among  the  first  of  the  American  Loyalists  to  leave  Long 
Island  and  New  York  for  their  new  homes  in  Nova  Scotia.  In 
March,  1782,  Captain  Simon  Baxter,  whose  escape  to  Burgoyne's 
army  referred  to  earlier  in  this  paper,  arrived  at  Fort  Howe  at  the 
mouth  of  the  St.  John  River  with  his  family  was  befriended  by 
several  persons  of  local  importance,  and  recommended  by  them  to 
the  authorities  in  Halifax.  Soon  afterwards  he  received  a  grant 
of  5,000  acres  in  what  is  now  the  Parish  of  Norton,  Kings  County, 
New  Brunswick.  In  the  same  year  in  which  Mr.  Baxter  landed 
at  Fort  Howe  a  paper  was  circulated  among  the  refugees  at 
Lloyd's  Neck  and  in  Queen's  County,  Long  Island,  (probably  at 
Springfield)  to  be  signed  by  those  approving  the  terms  contained 
in  the  "articles  of  settlement"  by  which  this  paper  was  accom- 
panied. The  terms  suggested  were  that  vessels  should  be  provided 
by  the  British  authorities  at  New  York  to  convey  the  emigrants, 
together  with  their  horses  and  cattle,  to  their  destination;  that 
clothing,  farming  implements,  arms  and  ammunition,  mill  stones, 
medicines,  and  one  year's  supply  of  provisions  should  be  furnished 
them,  and  that  lands  should  be  granted  to  them  in  the  country  to 
which  they  were  going,  including  a  sufficient  acreage  for  the 
support  of  a  church  and  a  school.  The  authors  of  these  articles 
of  settlement  were  Lieutenant  Colonel  Thompson,  Lieutenant 
Colonel  Edward  Winslow,  Major  Joshua  Upham,  who  was  now 

Raymond,  Winslow  Papers,  51,  57,  69,  70;  Winslow's  Muster  Rolls  (in 
the  possession  of  the  N.  B.  Hist.  Soc,  St.  John,  N.  B.);  Ellis,  Life  of  Rumford, 
124,  125,  129,  131,  136,  139-141,  143. 

2Sabine,  Am.  Loyalists,  (1847)  570,  363,  630;  Sec.  Rep.,  Bur.  of  Archives, 
Ont,  Pt.  272. 

13 


commandant  of  Fort  Franklin  at  Lloyd's  Neck,  and  several  others, 
including  Samuel  Cummings,  Esq.,  of  Hollis,  New  Hampshire. 
The  articles  received  the  general  approval  of  General  Sir  Guy 
Carleton,  who  in  a  letter  of  September  22d  solicited  the  assistance 
of  the  Governor  of  Nova  Scotia  for  these  refugees.  Those  who 
signified  their  intention  of  going  numbered  177  men,  99  women, 
and  316  children.  Nine  transports  were  required  for  their  convey- 
ance, and  the  Amphitrite  and  another  of  the  king's  frigates  acted 
as  convoys.  On  October  19th  this  fleet  entered  the  Annapolis 
Basin  but  did  not  discharge  its  passengers  until  the  following  day, 
when  Robert  Briggs,  the  commander  of  the  Amphitrite,  who  had 
treated  the  exiles  under  his  care  with  generous  consideration,  even 
spending  £200  of  his  own  money  to  make  them  comfortable  during 
the  voyage  was  presented  with  an  address  of  appreciation  and 
thanks  signed  by  Amos  Botsford,  Samuel  Cummings,  Elijah 
Williams,  and  others.1 

When  this  band  of  expatriated  Americans  arrived  at  their 
destination,  Annapolis  Royal  was  a  mere  hamlet  of  120  inhab- 
itants, but  already  its  two  best  educated,  if  not  most  serviceable, 
citizens  were  refugees  from  the  States.  One  of  these  was  Ben- 
jamin Snow,  a  graduate  of  Dartmouth  College  in  New  Hampshire, 
who  had  opened  a  grammar  school  in  the  village  the  preceding 
year,  and  the  other  was  the  Reverend  Jacob  Bailey,  a  graduate  of 
Harvard  College,  who  had  but  recently  become  the  rector  of  St. 
Luke's  Parish.  In  October,  1777,  Mr.  Bailey  had  managed  to  es- 
cape from  Pownalsborough,  Maine,  to  Boston,  and  later  with  his 
family  to  Halifax.  Thence,  in  October,  1779,  he  removed  to  Corn- 
wallis  where  he  remained  as  pastor  of  the  Church  of  England 
until  1782,  when  he  came  to  Annapolis.  An  eye-witness  of  the 
landing  of  this  first  concourse  of  his  fellow-exiles,  though  the  num- 
ber of  them  was  much  less  than  of  those  moving  at  different  times 
during  the  following  months,  Mr.  Bailey  has  depicted  in  various 
letters,  written  at  the  time,  the  severe  experiences  of  Annapolis 
and  its  numerous  guests.  The  more  than  500  newcomers  proved 
to  be  "a  prodigious  addition"  to  the  population  of  the  place,  crowd- 
ing the  houses  and  barracks  beyond  their  utmost  capacity,  so  that 

Raymond,  The  River  St.  John,  506;  N.  B.  Courier,  Mar.  28,  1835;  Rep. 
on  the  Am.  Mss.  in  the  Roy.  Inst,  of  G.  Brit.,  Ill,  144,  159,  207;  Savary,  Hist, 
of  the  Co.  of  Annapolis  Supplement,  36. 


many  were  unable  to  procure  lodgings.  Both  the  inhabitants  and 
the  soldiers  were  "lost  among  the  strangers,"  who  were  "a  mix- 
ture from  every  Province  on  the  Continent  except  Georgia,"  not  a 
few  of  them  being  "peeple  of  fashion."  Mr.  Bailey  received  into 
his  own  house  the  family  of  Mr.  Cummings,  and  was  told  by  this 
gentleman  that  another  considerable  fleet  might  be  expected  in 
three  weeks  and  2,000  more  families  in  the  spring.  He  learned 
further  that  the  Loyalists  had  come  well  supplied  "with  clothing 
and  provisions  for  a  twelve  month,  besides  all  instruments  for 
husbandry,"  and  that  those  who  had  belonged  to  what  he  called 
"the  Gentlemen  Volunteers"  were  receiving  five  shillings  per  day. 
The  Whigs  up  the  Annapolis  River  were  so  highly  displeased  with 
the  arrival  of  the  immigrants  that  they  threatened  to  petition  the 
government  for  their  removal  and  one  impecunious  inhabitant  pro- 
claimed himself  ready  to  pay  £50  towards  their  deportation.1 

Before  the  withdrawal  of  these  Loyalists  from  Long  Island, 
Sir  Guy  Carleton  had  advised  them  to  send  agents  to  examine 
vacant  lands  for  settlement.  These  agents,  who  were  Amos  Botsford, 
Samuel  Cummings,  and  Frederick  Hauser,  hastened  to  Halifax 
with  a  letter  from  the  Commander  in  Chief  to  Governor  Parr,  rec- 
ommending them  to  the  latter' s  consideration  as  persons  entitled  on 
on  every  account  to  the  grants  of  land  they  were  seeking  and 
such  other  advantages  as  had  been  promised  by  proclamation,  or 
otherwise,  to  intending  settlers.  After  a  satisfactory  interview 
with  the  Governor  and  the  Surveyor  General,  Charles  Morris,  the 
agents  returned  and  explored  the  country  from  Annapolis  to  St. 
Mary's  Bay  and  then  crossed  the  Bay  of  Fundy  to  the  River  St. 
John  near  the  end  of  November,  1782.  Finding  the  river  impass- 
able for  boats  at  this  season  of  the  year,  they  travelled  on  foot 
about  70  miles  up-stream  to  the  Oromocto  and  also  went  up  the 
Kennecbeccasis.  Returning  to  Annapolis,  the  agents  wrote  to 
friends  in  New  Y~ork,  January  14, 1783,  an  account  of  their  journey, 
in  which  they  expressed  a  favorable  opinion  of  the  lands  they  had 
just  viewed  on  the  St.  John,  because  these  could  be  secured  sooner 
than  those  near  Annapolis,  were  sufficiently  close  to  the  cod  fishery 

]Sabine,  Am.  Loyalists  (1864)  I,  201;  Bartlet,  Frontier  Missionary,  191-193; 
Calnek  and  Savary,  Co.  of  Annapolis,  604,  66-68;  Polit.  Magazine  (London, 
Eng.),  1783;  Campbell,  Hist,  of  Nova  Scotia,  170,  171;  Rev.  W.  O.  Raymond's 
Notebook  (unpublished),  Rev.  J.  Bailey  to  Thos.  Robie,  Oct.  19  1782,  Rev. 
Bailey  to  Capt.  Farrel,  Oct.  21,  1782. 

15 


in  the  Bay  of  Fundy,  and  were  secure  against  both  the  Americans 
and  the  Indians.  They  added  that  some  of  their  associates  were 
in  favor  of  settling  on  the  St.  John,  while  others  preferred  Conway 
(now  Digby),  but  that  for  the  winter  all  were  settled,  a  part  in  the 
town  of  Annapolis,  a  part  in  the  barracks,  and  a  part  up  the  An- 
napolis River  for  a  distance  of  20  miles  under  terms  made  with 
the  inhabitants,  and  that  while  some  were  already  doing  well,  the 
others  had  nothing  to  live  on  but  their  provisions.1 

How  many  of  the  associated  Loyalists  at  Annapolis  settled  on 
the  St.  John  River  is  not  known,  but  certainly  some  of  the  refugees 
from  New  Hampshire  located  in  the  region  north  of  the  Bay  of 
Fundy.  One  of  these  was  John  Stinson  of  Hillsboro,  who  went  to 
St.  John  in  May,  1783,  and  became  a  grantee  of  the  town,  although 
he  spent  a  year  at  Maugerville  and  lived  later  in  Lincoln,  Sunbury 
County.  Captain  John  Cochran  and  John  Holland  also  settled  in 
St.  John,  the  former  being  able  to  maintain  the  style  of  a  gentle- 
man, while  the  latter  was  elected  sheriff  of  the  county.  Lieutenant 
John  Davidson,  who  served  as  deputy  surveyor  in  the  province  for 
some  years,  settled  in  Dumfries,  York  County,  and  became  a  member 
of  the  House  of  Assembly  in  1802.  Hugh  Ruinton  of  Londonderry 
took  up  his  abode  in  the  Province  in  1783,  and  Solomon  Stephens 
was  a  resident  of  Musquash  at  the  time  of  his  death  in  1819.2 

Although  some  of  the  King's  American  Dragoons  accompanied 
the  large  party  sailing  for  Annapolis  about  October  1,  1782,  the 
greater  part  of  the  regiment  did  not  leave  New  York  for  Nova 
Scotia  until  the  following  spring.  Sir  Guy  Carleton  mentions  them 
in  a  letter  of  April  26  to  Major  General  Paterson,  in  which  he  en- 
closed embarkation  returns  of  the  troops  and  refugees  going  to 
different  parts  of  that  province.  In  this  letter  he  states  that  he 
had  consented  to  the  request  of  the  Dragoons  to  be  sent  to  St. 
John  River,  and  that  they  were  to  proceed  directly  to  that  place. 
The  corps' did  not  arrive  at  its  destination  until  the  end  of  June, 
when  it  encamped  on  Lancaster  Height  just  back  of  Carleton,  and 
was  employed  in  cutting  and  clearing  the  streets  of  the  town  that 
was  rapidly  forming.     Colonel  Edward  Winslow,  who  saw  them 

Raymond,  The  River  St.  John,  510,  511;  Murdoch,  Hist,  of  Nova  Scotia, 
III,  13-15;  Wilson,  Hist,  of  the  Co.  of  Digby,  N.  S.,  46. 

2Second  Rep.,  Bur.  of  Archives,  Ont,  Pt.  1, 101,  272;  Sabine,  Am.  Loyalists, 
635,  216,  363;  Raymond,  Winslow  Papers,  95,  n.;  Sabine,  Am.  Loyalists,  551, 
631. 

16 


engaged  in  this  work,  was  impressed  by  their  general  cheerfulness 
and  good  humor,  and  noted  that  they  were  enjoying  a  great  variety 
of  what  New  Yorkers  would  call  luxuries,  such  as  partridges,  wild 
pigeons,  sajmon,  bass,  and  trout.     However,  these  pleasures  of  the 
regiment  were  soon  to  be  interrupted,  for  it  was  found  that  the 
men  could  not  provide  themselves  with  winter  quarters  where  they 
were  without  serious  inconvenience  to  the  many  Loyalists  settling 
at  the  mouth  of  the  river.     They  were  therefore  ordered  on  August 
8  to  proceed  about  100  miles  up  the  St.  John  to  the  land  allotted 
them  in  the  district  assigned  to  the  provincial  regiments.     The 
Dragoons  were  the  first  to  settle  here,  their  grant  extending  from 
Long's  Creek,  twenty  miles  above  Frederiction,  to  the  "Barony" 
at  the  mouth  of  the  Pokiok,  and  being  christened  by  them  the 
township  of  Prince  William,  in  honor  of  their  royal  patron,  after- 
wards King  William  IV.     It  was  not  long  before  several  officers  of 
the  corps  became  prominent  in  the  affairs  of  New  Brunswick.     Thus, 
Major  Joshua  Upham  attained  a  seat  on  the  supreme  bench,  as  did 
also  Ward  Chipman,  the  paymaster  of  the  corps;  Major  Daniel 
Murray  served  some  years  as  a  member  of  the  House  of  Assembly 
for  York  County  and  as  a  leading  magistrate;  Lieutenant  John 
Davidson,  a  prominent  land  surveyor,  also  represented  York  County 
in  the  provincial  legislature;  Captain  Jonathan  Odell  became  the 
first  provincial  secretary  and  held  the  office  for  28  years,  and  after 
him  his  son,  William  F.  Odell,  held  the  same  post  for  32  years; 
Surgeon  Adino   Paddock  achieved  an  enviable   reputation  as  a 
physician;  Quartermaster  Edward  Sands  became  a  leading  merchant 
of  the  City  of  St.  John,  and  Cornet  Arthur  Nicholson  commanded 
the  garrison  at  Presquisle.1 

Ex-Governor  Wentworth  returned  from  England  to  Halifax, 
September  20,  1783,  to  take  up  the  duties  of  surveyor  general  of 
the  King's  woods  in  Nova  Scotia  at  a  salary  of  £800  a  year  and  an 
allowance  of  a  guinea  a  day  while  in  actual  service.  It  was 
reported  at  the  time  that  his  family  would  follow  him  in  the 
spring.  For  the  next  nine  years  Mr.  Wentworth  was  chiefly 
occupied  in  travelling  about  the  Province  and  preventing  the 
cutting  of  timber  on  the  royal  preserves,  as  also  the  unlicensed 

Report  on  Am.  Mss.  in  the  Roy.  Inst,  of  G.  Brit.,  IV,  55;  Raymond, Wins- 
low  Papers,  102,  123,  183;  Raymond,  The  Dispatch  of  Woodstock,  N.  B.,  Nov. 
28,  1906. 

17 


felling  of  pine  trees  which  wj^ere  suitable  for  masts,  whether  on 
granted  or  ungranted  lands,  since  these  were  destined  for  the  use 
of  the  British  navy.  Toward  the  close  of  1784  he  appointed 
Benjamin  Marston  to  be  his  deputy  in  New  Brunswick.  In  March, 
1792,  the  ex-Governor  was  again  in  London.  During  this  visit 
he  was  knighted  and  also  appointed  to  succeed  Mr.  Parr  as  lieu- 
tenant governor  of  Nova  Scotia.  On  his  return  to  Halifax,  May 
12,  he  was  welcomed  by  the  civil  and  military  authorities  of  the 
Province  and  was  sworn  into  office  two  days  later.  He  continued 
to  administer  the  government  of  Nova  Scotia  for  16  years,  being 
retired  in  April,  1808,  on  the  arrival  of  Sir  George  Prevost.  In 
the  following  month  the  Assembly  voted  him  £500  sterling  per 
annum  as  a  pension  for  life,  in  compliance  with  the  wishes  of  the 
King,  who  announced  his  intention  of  making  additional  provision 
for  the  declining  days  of  his  faithful  servant.  Sir  John  and  Lady 
Wentworth  now  took  up  their  residence  at  the  Prince's  Lodge 
near  Halifax,  and  continued  to  live  there,  except  while  absent  in 
England  in  1810  and  1811,  until  Sir  John's  death,  April  8,  1820, 
in  his  84th  year.1 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  Amos  Botsf ord  accepted  a  commission 
from  Governor  Parr  as  soliciting  agent  for  Conway,  and  together 
with  300  others  received  a  patent  for  a  township  comprising 
100,000  acres  at  the  southern  end  of  the  Annapolis  Basin,  it  is  prob- 
able that  a  number  of  Botsford's  associates  participated  in  set- 
tling this  locality.  Manyof  the  patentees,  however,  had  entered  the 
Province  since  the  arrival  of  the  first  association  (or  in  June,  1783), 
and  as  the  vessels  that  brought  them  to  Conway — seven  in  num- 
ber— had  been  supplied  by  Rear  Admiral  Robert  Digby,  the  new- 
comers interceded  with  the  government  to  change  the  name  of  the 
township  to  Digby,  and  the  patent  contained  a  clause  carrying  their 
desire  into  effect.  Among  the  names  appearing  in  this  document, 
which  was  dated  February  20,  1784,  are  those  of  several  men  al- 
ready familiar  to  us  as  refugees  from  New  Hampshire,  namely, 
Thomas  Cummings,  Josiah  Jones,  Enos  and  Phineas  Stevens,  and 
Elijah  Williams.  In  keeping  with  the  resolution  of  the  patentees 
to  erect  a  town,  Deputy  Surveyor  Thomas  Milledge  laid  out  a  plot 
containing  about  70  acres,  and  lots  were  drawn  by  the  settlers 

Raymond,  Winslow  Papers,  133,  134,  258,  n.,  388,  389,  391,  394,  615,  n., 
632,  646,  656,  663;  Murdoch,  Hist,  of  Nova  Scotia,  III,  277,  281-283. 

18 


under  the  supervision  of  Surveyors  Milledge  and  John  Harris  of 
Annapolis  and  Amos  Botsford  in  his  capacity  as  agent  for  the 
colonists.  Meantime,  the  Reverend  Edward  W.  Brudenell,  Rich- 
ard Hill,  and  John  Stump  had  been  appointed  to  act  with  Mr. 
Botsford  as  a  land  board,  and  this  board  located  the  other  settlers 
regardless  of  necessary  formalities,  except  in  assigning  the  num- 
bers of  their  respective  lots.  The  colonists  labored  throughout 
the  summer  in  clearing  away  the  forest  and  erecting  log  houses, 
or  in  some  instances  houses  built  with  oak  frames  that  had  been 
brought  from  the  States.  A  few  of  the  log  structures  were  after- 
wards enlarged,  covered  with  boards  and  shingles,  and  survived 
for  more  than  a  century.1 

But  although  Digby  sprang  into  existence  during  the  year 
1783,  many  of  the  Loyalists  in  the  neighborhood  were  reported, 
September  16,  1784,  as  being  still  unsettled  "on  account  of  the  negli- 
gent and  dilatory  conduct  of  those  appointed  to  lay  out  lands  for 
them."  Fully  one-third  of  the  persons  named  in  the  Botsford  grant 
failed  to  occupy  their  lots.  Others  who  were  not  included  in  the 
patent  were  nevertheless  assigned  lands,  or  went  upon  them  with- 
out authority,  even  including  the  common  and  the  glebe.  When 
complaints  were  made  against  this  illegal  procedure,  the  squatters 
promptly  made  demands  for  allotments.  While  this  contention 
was  in  progress  a  British  man-of-war,  which  had  been  despatched 
with  provisions  and  implements  for  the  colony,  was  detained  by 
adverse  winds,  and  the  settlers  were  brought  to  the  verge  of  star- 
vation on  account  of  the  smallness  of  the  season's  crops.  During 
the  disturbances  that  followed  a  discharged  officer,  who  had  done 
much  in  promoting  the  settlement  and  was  both  a  deputy  land 
surveyor  and  a  justice  of  the  peace,  was  charged  with  disloyal  acts 
by  the  puisne  judges  before  the  Governor  and  the  Council,  and  suf- 
fered the  loss  of  his  justiceship,  June  16,  1785.  An  extensive  out- 
break was  avoided  only  by  the  wise  management  of  certain  officials 
and  the  timely  arrival  of  the  delayed  supplies.  But  sufficient  harm 
had  already  been  done  to  cause  many  of  the  best  residents  to  re- 
move from  Digby.  Some  of  these  returned  to  the  States,  while 
others  removed  to  Granville  farther  up  the  Annapolis  Basin,  or 
crossed  the  Bay  of  Fundy  to  St.  John.  A  few  went  to  Weymouth, 
which  lies  on  the  east  side  of  St.  Mary's  Bay  about  seventeen  miles 
Wilson  Hist,  of  the  Co.  of  Digby,  N.  S.,  52,  48,  49,  50,  64,  65. 

19 


south  of  Digby,  among  these  being  Enos  and  Phineas  Stevens  and 
Josiah  Jones  who,  as  we  have  seen,  had  come  originally  from  New 
Hampshire,  i 

The  departure  of  these  dissatisfied  ones  only  complicated,  in- 
stead of  relieving,  the  situation,  for  they  neglected  to  dispose  of 
their  shares  in  the  township,  and  left  their  unimproved  lots  to  be 
occupied  and  cultivated  by  others  having  no  legal  title  to  them. 
The  increasing  difficulties  of  the  problem  were  brought  to  the  at- 
tention of  the  provincial  House  of  Assembly,  April  2, 1795,  by  sev- 
eral grantees  of  the  township,  who  urged  that  commissioners  be 
appointed  to  look  into  the  question,  on  account  of  the  injury  that 
the  settlement  was  suffering  through  continued  expense  and  litiga- 
tion.    Two  days  later  a  bill  was  introduced  to  quiet  the  possession 
of  lands  within  the  township.     For  some    reason,  which    is   not 
stated  in  the  official  records,  action  was  deferred  until  the  next 
session,  when  a  new  bill  was  presented,  but  with  no  better  success. 
In  June,  1798,  the  inhabitants  of  Digby  petitioned  the  Council,  and 
a  commission  of  inquiry  was  appointed.     However,  this  body  so 
far  failed  in  its  duty  that  a  new  appeal  was  presented  in  October, 
and  a  second  board  of  commissioners  was  named,  and  was  given 
power  to  employ  a  clerk  and  one  or  more  deputy  surveyors  "at  the 
expense  of  those  immediately  interested."     This  board  took  ample 
time  to  accomplish  its  task  with  thoroughness,  and  at  length  sub- 
mitted a  report  recommending  that  the  landholders,  whether  claim- 
ing by  grant  or  occupancy,  be  considered  actual  owners,  and  that  a 
new  patent,  or  "grant  of  confirmation,"  be  immediately  issued  as- 
signing to  the  276  real  estate  proprietors,  then  residents  of  Digby 
Township,  the  tracts  held  by  them  respectively.     This  report  be- 
came the  text  of  the  proposed  grant,  and  on  January  31,  1801,  was 
signed  by  Sir  John  Wentworth  as  lieutenant  governor  and  coun- 
tersigned by  Benning  Wentworth  as  secretary  of  the  Province  of 
Nova  Scotia.     Thus,  after  17  years,  during  which  Digby  had  re- 
mained at  a  standstill  in  population,  the  inhabitants  of  the  town 
were  freed  from  their  burden  of  suspense,  and  given  the  legal  as- 
surance that  the  lands  which  they  had  cleared  and  tilled  were  their 
own.     It  is,  of  course,  obvious  that  the  grievances  of  people  of 
Digby  did  not  receive  just  treatment  until  they  came  before  the 

'Raymond,  Winslow  Papers,  189;  Wilson,  Hist,  of  the  Co.  of  Digby,  N.  S., 
76,  77,  75. 

20 


Council  of  the  Province,  and  it  is  worthy  of  note  that  the  "grant 
of  confirmation"  bears  the  official  signatures  of  two  distinguished 
Loyalists  from  New  Hampshire,  who  were  fully  able  to  appreciate 
the  sad  plight  in  which  their  fellow  refugees  at  Digby  had  long 
been  placed  by  force  of  circumstances.  1 

Not  a  few  of  the  founders  of  Digby  were  educated  men, 
while  others  possessed  no  more  than  an  ordinary  education,  or  only 
the  rudiments  of  knowledge.  Among  their  number  was  William 
Barbancks,  who  is  said  to  have  been  "a  worthy  and  competent 
tutor,"  and  soon  began  to  teach  reading,  writing,  and  arithmetic 
to  the  children  of  the  scattered  settlement,  although  he  was  under 
the  necessity  of  going  from  one  homestead  to  another  for  the 
purpose.  As  Mr.  Barbancks  was  induced  to  remove  to  Gulliver's 
Cove  before  long,  the  colonists  engaged  the  services  of  Lieutenant 
James  Foreman,  a  graduate  of  a  high  school  in  England,  who 
opened  a  "superior  school"  early  in  November,  1784,  in  his  own 
dwelling,  with  an  enrollment  of  75  pupils.  During  the  summers 
of  1785  and  1786,  Mr.  Foreman  also  conducted  a  class  in  the 
Anglican  catechism  and  selections  from  the  Scriptures.  The  need 
for  more  commodious  quarters  led  to  the  erection  of  a  schoolhouse 
in  1789,  by  voluntary  subscriptions.  This  building,  which  was 
fitted  with  long  desks  for  both  elementary  and  senior  pupils  and  a 
brick  furnace,  remained  the  center  of  education  for  the  residents 
of  the  county  until  the  establishment  of  an  academy  at  Digby. 2 

The  first  religious  service  held  in  the  new  settlement  was  in 
1783,  when  the  Reverend  Edward  W.  Brudenell  delivered  a  sermon. 
About  two  years  later  the  Reverend  Jacob  Bailey  came  over  from 
Annapolis  and  conducted  worship  in  the  house  of  one  ot  the  resi- 
dents. As  the  Loyalists  of  Digby  and  its  vicinity  were  Episcopal- 
ians, and  had  now  made  considerable  progress  with  their  settlement, 
they  held  their  first  vestry  meeting,  September  29,  1785,  elected 
officers,  and  instructed  their  church  wardens  to  petition  the  Gov- 
ernor to  establish  the  limits  of  a  parish  to  be  called  Trinity  Parish. 
The  name  which  they  suggested  is  reminiscent  of  the  fact  that 
many  of  the  pioneers  had  been  members  of  Trinity  Church  in  New 
York  City,  under  the  ministrations  of  the  Reverend  Charles  Inglis, 
D.  D.     Governor  Parr  fixed  the  boundaries  of  the  parish,  March  3, 

'Wilson,  Hist,  of  the  Co.  of  Digby,  N.  S.,  77-81,  111. 
-Ibid.,  92,  93. 

21 


1786,  and  before  many  months  had  passed  a  church  was  built  by 
local  subscriptions,  aided  by  an  appropriation  from  the  provincial 
fund  for  building  and  repairing  established  churches,  and  a  gener- 
ous contribution  from  Admiral  Digby,  who  also  presented  a  bell. 
This  structure  and  the  adjoining  burial  ground  were  consecrated 
by  Dr.  Inglis,  who  was  now  bishop  of  Nova  Scotia,  July  31, 1788.1 

It  will  have  been  noted  that  New  Hampshire's  treatment  of 
the  Tory  element  in  her  population  was  relatively  moderate.  She 
permitted  Loyalists  to  leave  the  State,  and  indeed  by  the  resolu- 
tion of  January  16,  1777,  she  encouraged  them  to  go,  but  she  did 
not  expel  them,  and  many  of  them  remained.  Those  who  did  go, 
however,  were  forbidden  to  return  by  the  act  of  November,  1778. 
The  ultimate  success  of  the  Revolutionists  does  not  seem  to  have 
changed  their  opinion  of  their  absentee  brethren.  In  the  spring 
of  1783,  the  town  of  Hollis  voted  to  instruct  its  representatives 
against  permitting  the  return  of  the  refugees  or  the  restoration  of 
"their  forfeited  estates."  About  a  year  later  Elijah  Williams  put 
in  his  appearance  at  Keene,  and  was  promptly  bound  over  to  the 
court  of  sessions  at  Charlestown,  which  ordered  him  to  leave  the 
State  as  soon  as  he  had  transacted  his  business.  After  settling 
his  affairs  Williams  departed  for  Nova  Scotia,  but  he  was  not  long 
in  finding  his  way  back  to  Deerfield  in  consequence  of  ill  health, 
and  there  he  died.2 

Some  of  the  non-jurors  who  had  remained  within  the  borders 
of  the  State  during  the  war  were  as  unforgiving  as  the  Revolu- 
tionists, and  showed  no  inclination  to  become  reconciled  to  the 
outcome  of  the  war.  A  notable  instance  of  this  sort  is  disclosed 
by  the  petition  of  Ebenezer  Rice  and  Lieutenant  Benjamin  Tyler, 
March  4, 1784,  to  Governor  General  Haldimand  at  Quebec,  request- 
ing permission  for  their  own  and  46  other  families  of  Claremont 
to  settle  on  Lake  Memphremagog,  or  on  the  west  bank  of  the 
Connecticut  River.  They  explained  that  they  had  always  been 
loyal  subjects  of  King  George  III,  were  members  of  the  Church  of 
England,  but  were  "overburdened  with  Usurpation,  Tyrene,  and 
opression  from  the  Hands  of  Violent  Men,"  who  had  used  every 
art  to  include  them  among  the  proscribed  in  the  late  Revolution, 

Wilson,  Hist,  of  the  Co.  of  Digby,  N.  S.,  88,  87,  89,  90. 

2Worcester,  The  Town  of  Hollis,  N.  H.,  in  the  War  of  the  Rev.  (a  reprint 
from  the  N.  E.  Hist,  and  Gen.  Reg.,  July,  1876);  Colls.  N.  H.  Hist.  Soc.  II, 
134,  135. 

22 


and  that  they  were  therefore  impatient  to  find  an  asylum  in  their 
"Royal  Master's  Dominion."  They  hoped  that  after  those  who 
had  been  meritorious  in  service  should  be  provided  for,  their  own 
petition  might  receive  favorable  consideration.  Not  content  to  de- 
pend solely  on  a  written  plea,  the  petitioners  sent  Captain  Benjamin 
Summer  to  Quebec  with  a  letter  for  Surveyor  General  Samuel 
Holland  from  the  clerk  wardens  and  vestrymen  of  their  church 
begging  his  assistance  in  favor  of  their  request.  It  is  interesting 
to  note  that  the  list  of  48  names  submitted  with  the  petition  con- 
tains a  number  that  also  appear  among  those  of  the  non-jurors  of 
Claremont,  May  30,  1776.1 

The  lapse  of  more  time  was  needed  to  remove  the  antipathies 
of  the  past,  and  in  the  case  of  James  Sheafe  of  Portsmouth,  who 
had  suffered  imprisonment  for  his  Toryism,  a  complete  restora- 
tion to  popular  favor  occurred,  for  in  1802  Mr.  Sheafe  was  elected 
a  United  States  senator  from  New  Hampshire,  and  fourteen  years 
later  he  came  within  2,000  votes  of  being  chosen  governor  of  the 
State.2 

JHaldimand  Papers,  B.  175.  pp.  251,  253-255;  N.  H.  State  Papers,  Docs., 
and  Records  from  1776  to  1783,  VIII,  218-220. 
^McClinntock,  Hist,  of  N.  H.,  510,  511. 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  50  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $1.00  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


NOV     9     1933 


MOV   10  1933 


_W!     \V 


14Dcc55yM.U: 


mcs— i 


~$0k- 


& 


D  LD 


M&L 


italic 


REC'D  LD 


l-LB    11962 


IN  STACKS 


ArR  -.  C    *  •■ 


7  Feb'62LZ 


LD21-100m-7,'33 


PAT.  IAN.  21.  iw» 


t  5043? 


';#. 


699223 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


>•'•■.'■•;■  :>.-      ,-  ■        :..;    -•■ 


